Watching Barnaby Joyce being interviewed by Lee Sales on 7.30 last Tuesday was like an over the hill comedian in the final throes of his decline. He couldn’t get through a line without fluffing it. In doing so, he refused to answer any questions at all to the point where one wondered what on earth he was there for.
There was a time when he looked under the weather part of the time, whereas now It’s most of the time.
I expected that as a Coalition, and given the importance of the matter, they would have worked ferociously together to develop a plan to tackle climate change. After all, the Coalition has done nothing for a generation except tell lies along the way.
The best Joyce had to offer was that they would put something to us this week. We will have a gander, see what we think and let them know.
Writing for The Guardian, Katherine Murphy reported that.
“Darren Chester has declared there’s “about a 95% chance” the Nationals will line up behind a net zero target because “Barnaby Joyce can count, and the majority of the room is in favour of credible action.”
Before all this, however, the Murdoch rags had laid out their plans for our future. The tabloids ran with green and gold pages front pages “Green and Gold.” Questions, cynicism and concern ran down the gutters of the buildings that housed the words of untruth. It was a warning.
— Matt Bevan (@MatthewBevan) October 10, 2021
From The Daily Telegraph to the Herald Sun, The Courier-Mail to Adelaide’s Advertiser, their printing presses at full speed printed words of opportunity that would never have been considered for a decade.
The Murdoch pages were suddenly embellished with comments about the economic prospects of Australia who would now be at the forefront of the climate revolution. Here we were front and centre as “the best-placed nation on earth to be the global winner in a net-zero world“.
On ABC News 24, Bridget McKenzie said much the same thing, but Angus Taylor made it clear that we could meet the 2050 net zero target with the already identified techniques without harming mining and jobs. Which, of course, is bullshit, and some areas are yet unproven in their application.
So, what is all the fuss about, you might ask? Well, it’s relatively simple; no one believes them.
All this is happening in the shadows of a spectacularly robust turnaround on climate change. I use the term pre-arranged because it has to be more than just sheer coincidence that Murdoch’s Australian rags would all of a sudden change direction.
Then as if to confirm all that Murdoch had printed was true, The Business Council of Australia announced on the weekend that more ambitious short-term emissions-reduction targets – could boost economic activity by as much as $890 billion. On Thursday, October 14, the Reserve Bank joined the fray, saying Australia cannot hide from global drive to net-zero by 2050.
As David Crowe wrote in The SMH on October 11, 2021:
“Newspapers that once warned of a $600 billion cost from cutting emissions now claimed a $2 trillion benefit from doing the same thing.”
How astonishing it is that a party who has trodden the road of disbelief with the help of a newspaper baron with no scientific knowledge, and having flown the flag of doubt for around 13 years, Murdoch now tells us they were wrong all along. In my 80 years, never have l heard such hypocrisy.
Morrison is, if nothing else is determined to do a deal with the Nationals. Just how far he will go to meet their demands is beyond me. A fair clue is in the comments of the Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor about the ongoing future of coal and gas. “Net zero doesn’t mean zero emissions,” he said.
Seemingly, this would mean a fair way in anyone’s language.
Suppose you look at News Corp’s sudden enthusiastic endorsement, their history on climate change and beyond. In that case, it seems evident that (as Rachael Withers puts it in The Monthly) “Murdoch’s “Mission Zero” is aimed at a coal-friendly net-zero – which experts say would be a fraudulent one. There’s less and less hope that Morrison’s mission will be any better.”
Science has made the most staggering achievements in my lifetime, and they are embraced, recognised, and enjoyed by all sections of society. For the likes of Bridget McKenzie and Andrew Bolt to now say they are being marginalised is nothing more than sad cries from sad losers. They should be happy that they have successfully conned so many folks with the sort of crap that Tony Abbott once used to describe the condition of the planet.
I cannot understand people who accept science as fact and use it every day somehow become brain-dead when it comes to climate science.
But whatever agreement the Liberals reach with the National Party, you can be assured of one thing: It will not be legislated because some members will cross the floor and bring down the government. So, it won’t be worth the paper it is written on, not until it is made into law.
* * * * *
Let me finish with some thoughts to ponder. I forgive the Murdochs, his editors and his many acolytes, including Nick Minchin (a politician) Lord Monckton, (a discredited nutter who was once a lobbyist for tobacco companies), Andrew Bolt, (a journalist), Cardinal George Pell (an old school literalist religious priest), Prof Ian Plimer (a geologist) and Alan Jones (non-descript). None of whom has a degree in climate science yet have sided with the anti-science brigade. So, believing that having the ability to admit that you were wrong is an absolute prerequisite to discernment and knowledge. In the view that Rupert’s turn around is genuine, I forgive all those of guilty conscience.
They have opinions, that’s all, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but they have no expertise. Now that’s not to say that they should not have a view, and that view should not be considered, as should any laypersons if they are of that ilk. But surely, we must respect the science otherwise; you put into question all science.
However, we should take no satisfaction from this unsought triumph.
A recent study from the journal “Public Understanding of Science” found that conservative media like Murdoch-owned, diabolically dishonest Fox News undermined viewers’ trust in scientists, leading to weaker beliefs in the science of global warming.
Neoconservatives commonly believe that the science of climate change is a left-wing conspiracy to replace communism. Strangely, this conspiratorial movement has no leader, no headquarters and no organised membership.
Fundamentalist Christians oppose science because the Bible is to be taken literally, meaning that the world was created in seven days. Everything within the book is God’s word and cannot be questioned. God created this earth, and it’s our right to do what we like with it (70% of Americans believe this).
All this, of course, is supported by a pathetic power-hungry discredited man of no redeeming features whose only attribute as a human being is the pursuit and creation of wealth. His name is Rupert Murdoch, and he is one of the world’s best-known faces. He is known not for grace, benevolence, charity or compassion but greed, power and superiority.
Murdoch-owned papers, which control about 70 per cent of the Australian cities markets, have run covers featuring former PM Kevin Rudd as a Nazi, as Col. Klink from Hogan’s Heroes, and Mr Rude from the Mr Men kids’ books. News Corp’s Daily Telegraph in Sydney has dropped all pretence of impartiality.
My thought for the day
Lying in the media is wrong at any time, however when they do it by deliberate omission it is even more so. Murdoch’s papers seem to do it with impunity.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!